One should remark at the **pair** : typically, queens don't nest in pairs, but sometimes I think that sister queens will move in together --rather, more that one will move in with the other who's already begun a nest. (This tiny nest hasn't produced an adult, we can deduce from the size of cells.) I saw such a sharing happen one time, and it came only grudgingly on the part of the nest maker. There is an advantage : there's a parasitic fly that will lay eggs in the nest if it can --how sad to then see a wasp queen tend to young that will never come.
Regarding the lens, DPR presents a neat graphic comparing sizes::
>On the left is the size and design of the LX7's lens.> Next is the LX100.> On the far right is how gigantic the lens would be> if Panasonic simply upscaled the lens used on the LX7> to cover the larger sensor area.
1) Is this gigantic lens covering a true 4/3 area, or the lesser one of the LX100? (And that this lens is for eqiv. 24-90 & not 24-75.)
2) I'd like to see how the LX7-designed lens would grow to cover a 1" sensor --conceivably an option considered, vis-a-vis use of that sensor size in the FZ1000. (Some of us prefer MORE DoF and like the "fast"ness of "fast glass" for getting ample light to keep ISOs low & quality good.)
jkoch2: The LX7 has time lapse, built-in ND filter, 120fps 720p video, and currently sells for $260 at Amazon. The sensor is only 1/1.7, but the lens is a fast f/1.4 at wide and f/2.8 at long. It fits in a large pants pocket or any coat pocket.
Is it really worth another $600 to get a m4/3 sensor and 4k? Hard to think up a good lie that will persuade SWMBO.
That mechanical lens cover looks a bit vulnerable in the open mode, as if it could be circumcised accidentally.
correction : The LX*7* has a faster lens : 1.4 .. 2.3@60mmEquiv, not "2.8". (vs. 1.7 .. 2.8@75mm (maybe 2.5@60?))
Drofnad: > It annoyed me when Nikon used to produce H and S versions of its pro-end bodies, offering either resolution or speed. I knew that what we all wanted, and would eventually get, was both.
The letters were/are "H" & "X"; "s" (lowercase) is for an upgrade (the "H" was dropped for default, and only "X" used now for high-resolution. But where is the "get both" (in one camera)?! --in Canon's 1DX, perhaps? D3 saw D3X, and frankly D4 & D4s are complementing D800/e bodies (as the 1DX might be seen to stand vis-a-vis the 5DmkIII, though those resolutions are quite close). (One can read of people wanting a "D4X" (with not merely 36mpx but 54!).)
?? What about "D40X" is inconsistent? --it IS a mpx boost to the D40, and is consistent in that regard (as contrasted with, e.g., the D70s upgrade w/o such sensor change to the D70).
SammyToronto: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but this thing doesn't look beautiful to me. It may be built like a tank, but it looks like the average Sony/Samsung mirrorless camera and less attractive than the average Fuji/Olympus mirrorless camera.
Now, I'm not talking about performance, status, heritage or any of that, but purely on the aesthetic level this Leica underwhelms.
Amen, you said it. (That red badge makes reviewers go nuts. (Somehow, the ol' D-Lux4 was supposed to be soooo lovely vs. the LX3, though it lacked the functional element --a grip-- of the cheaper camera (one could pay even MORE to add the grip!).)
> It annoyed me when Nikon used to produce H and S versions of its pro-end bodies, offering either resolution or speed. I knew that what we all wanted, and would eventually get, was both.
Richard Murdey: Make no mistake, the GM1 is small. For hilarity, go to camerasize.com and compare against a Nikon D4. O_o
More to the point though, its functionally the same size as a Pentax Q7 .. essentially erasing the desirability of the latter. Once the price settles down to the $400 range, as it surely will, the relevancy of the Nikon V2 and Sony RX100ii also fall into question.
"compare to the D4" :: !!! Yes, I did that, too --and it's like the yacht & a dingy towed by it! As others note, though, re overall size, one mustn't ignore the lenses : some primes keep an overall small size but at the expense of FL variety of course (vs. RX100). But, for those who have invested in M4/3 gear, this tiny body can be a nice complement.
FYI, "Sam" isn't a "he" but a she --Samantha, maybe.
NB: **TWO** wasps, but on a tiny nest that insofar as I can see is unable to have yet held any adult (pupa) --the cells simply aren't big enough. This then indicates that these might be sister waps, one joining the other on her nest.
> $1300. What do you get for your money? Well, 'a new dot structure on the leather body trim' and a leather case with 'exclusive carrying strap'.
Wow, once again, Leica proves that they know what really matters in photography --who can doubt it?
burnin: All you need to know about this camera is that the case has a cut-out solely so the Leica label can be seen.
BRAVO for this observation and appropriate remark!!!
It says it all, so blantantly(as if pricing the D-Lux4 nearly double the Pany LX3--and providing a grip only as an option, for more money--didn't make the point equally clearly).
FOR $2500+ with FIXED zoom, I want that zoom to be FAST(-er than 3.5-5.6, common kit-lens for consumer cam.s speed)!
DPR, your comment below
> Canon's answer to the D600, the 20MP 6D, offers a slimmed-down feature set compared to its big brother the 5D Mark II but offers compelling features like built-in GPS and WiFi.
has the wrong model --should (now) be "Mark III", not "II".
And this Nikon guy casually suggesting that the D600 somehow sits nicely between the D800 & D7000 omits the serious hit a DX user w/DX lenses must take in order to be shooting FX!Yes, where IS the wanted "D400" !?
Nit: "Panasonic GF5 specification highlights"should read "... G5 ... ". (to repeat a prior post's similar alert)
Pentax Ricoh is listed as an exhibitor (yea!). [Google]
I'm also interested in what a similar shot would be like: move a little to the right, so that the lamps or perhapsbetter the rightmost edges of the lamp supports are in aline; would this then bring out a line on the left of thelamp posts!?
ps: I presume that aperture was f/5.6 not "56", and a littlesurprised that the shot is as deeply sharp as it is, given that.
Super shot. This is seen in Abstract, but suits even more aptlythe Winter Details challenge. How fortunate we are that youwere w/camera to catch this,thanks,-drofnad
... ........ ............. .. . . . . . . . . . . . s u b l i m e ! !
Wow, 8 seconds! With some filter or ... lighting?
This is a striking composition,and I'm also struck by the duration of exposure.
This image is much like the (color) one shown in theWikipedia entry for the derelict mill -- /slightly/ more tothe left (here), with decent foreground footing, and amore dramatic sky.(And I'm looking and thinking /Wow, a WA shot from the(viewer's) right side will capture a lot of vertical elements ... !/